At some point you can't do stimulus anymore and the only choice is austerity. In fact the choice will be made for you after some point, especially if your currency is not centrally controlled. That also brings up the question, what if there are no more good times and this is the new economic norm?

It probably is the end for what you might call Anglo/American style Capitalism,it's been a long and fairly successful pyramid scheme but the end is in sight and no amount of squirming and delaying tactics will stop the slide of US/British style economies into foundering.

At some point you can't do stimulus anymore and the only choice is austerity. In fact the choice will be made for you after some point, especially if your currency is not centrally controlled. That also brings up the question, what if there are no more good times and this is the new economic norm?

Please actually learn a thing or two about economics, this drivel you propagate is embarrassing and merely betrays your ignorance.

Austerity in this financial climate is utterly idiotic as has been proved by our government.

Ignoring your own sense of right/wrong and feelings on entitlement socialism and such viewing our current economic system as an abstract model, our current system is clearly and observably one that concentrates wealth, the rich are getting poorer and the poor and getting poorer.

Given that to maintain equilibrium progressive factors are vital, aka those that distribute wealth to the poor of which there are roughly three; charity, payroll and government spending/welfare. Of those Charity has a fairly minor impact, for payroll to result in a flow of cash towards the poor companies would have to be making a loss due to paying their employees too much, which is a rarity and thus we're left with government spending.

When government spends money it doesn't vanish into thin air, it recirculates and ideally it'll recirculate at the lowest of levels, before being spent with small businesses and then up into higher levels of investments getting as much work done as possible, after all that's all money is, a token we use to facilitate and motivate useful work.

The dystopia we're heading towards is one where there is little market that isn't cornered by a few huge profit generating corporations that any enterprise can succeed in, one where the gap between rich and poor is such that the economy tanks and the rich live in enclaves much like they do in some less developed nations.

You're seriously proposing austerity to avoid this eventuality? By actively pushing the system in that direction to *recover* out of such catastrophe!?

That ******** has never worked, time and time again through history and I can only presume that the approach has been accepted by a naive public who compares a nations economy to household finances whereby the obvious option is to cut spending while retaining a fixed income.

Countries are not on a fixed income, austerity measures are akin to punching the economy in the gut and the only people who benefit are those at the top, those with lobbying power, those who take advantage of the naive to further their own agendas.

It probably is the end for what you might call Anglo/American style Capitalism,it's been a long and fairly successful pyramid scheme but the end is in sight and no amount of squirming and delaying tactics will stop the slide of US/British style economies into foundering.

If any good is to come out of this crisis this is it.

This was always the main concern of the older members of the EU. Back in the 1960's when de Gaulle vetoed British entry to the EU, he warned that Anglo Saxon capitalism would over time destroy the EU. I really wish we had listen to him.

__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'

Please actually learn a thing or two about economics, this drivel you propagate is embarrassing and merely betrays your ignorance.

Austerity in this financial climate is utterly idiotic as has been proved by our government.

Ignoring your own sense of right/wrong and feelings on entitlement socialism and such viewing our current economic system as an abstract model, our current system is clearly and observably one that concentrates wealth, the rich are getting poorer and the poor and getting poorer.

Given that to maintain equilibrium progressive factors are vital, aka those that distribute wealth to the poor of which there are roughly three; charity, payroll and government spending/welfare. Of those Charity has a fairly minor impact, for payroll to result in a flow of cash towards the poor companies would have to be making a loss due to paying their employees too much, which is a rarity and thus we're left with government spending.

When government spends money it doesn't vanish into thin air, it recirculates and ideally it'll recirculate at the lowest of levels, before being spent with small businesses and then up into higher levels of investments getting as much work done as possible, after all that's all money is, a token we use to facilitate and motivate useful work.

The dystopia we're heading towards is one where there is little market that isn't cornered by a few huge profit generating corporations that any enterprise can succeed in, one where the gap between rich and poor is such that the economy tanks and the rich live in enclaves much like they do in some less developed nations.

You're seriously proposing austerity to avoid this eventuality? By actively pushing the system in that direction to *recover* out of such catastrophe!?

That ******** has never worked, time and time again through history and I can only presume that the approach has been accepted by a naive public who compares a nations economy to household finances whereby the obvious option is to cut spending while retaining a fixed income.

Countries are not on a fixed income, austerity measures are akin to punching the economy in the gut and the only people who benefit are those at the top, those with lobbying power, those who take advantage of the naive to further their own agendas.

You'll learn a thing or two about economics when your country is forced into austerity.

You are running the biggest sham in the history of the world, keep that in mind when you are mindlessly slamming the printers for new 100 dollar bills to spend.

The austerity experiment has been tried. It failed There is no austerity fairy. The UK should have made long term investments in infrastructure, education, and other activities that foster employment and prosperity. Instead, it decided to treat the poor and working classes as a consumable. The Tories always cite the upcoming problems with pensions, namely the number of younger workers required to support a single pensioner, but they never cite how many workers are required to support a rich person.

I'd like to see the UK government invest more in people and infrastructure (like wind and tidal power), create a sovereign fund during the good times so that it can be used during recessions, and make corporate managers more accountable. I'd also like to see wealth taxed, not just income.

I was under the impression that the UK was following the Canadian model of austerity. That worked well for them years ago, but it's not helping us. The main problem is the depth and speed of the cuts, it's insane. You need stimulus as well (you can have both). Its like they only have half a plan. But it was done like this for political reasons - they were hoping that things would be looking up by the end of their first 4 year term, thus ensuring re-election. I suspect they could lose the next election now, but it's hard to say when the opposition are so weak.

As much as I don't like what our government is doing, I do think they have got it all wrong, but there sure is lot of 'haha I told you so' going on. Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing...

The country that has done best economically since 2008 is China. They had a fully Keynesian stimulus that was so successful their economy nearly overheated.

I don't claim to be no big city economist but I'll be more impressed by China once their gdp per capita passes Albania. Poor countries getting richer quicker than rich countries isn't all that surprising to me.

I think that's optimistic. Politicians and the majority of the general public seem completely incapable of accepting the reality of the situation that we, as a country find ourselves in.

And even more frightening, is that they seem unwilling to actually really do anything about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risco

Make the banks lend to small business, none of this ***** footing around. Tax them heavily or fine them when they don't lend enough making it better financially to lend.

&

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risco

The second point is absolutely vital as until the banks start lending, the economy will continue to suffer.

As long as they're viable businesses (doesn't matter whether they're small, medium or large business really). Lest we forget that one of the major contributory factors to the bust was irresponsible lending and borrowing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mord

Manufacturing is a mugs game IMO, it's always good to have some on the go but do we really want to be a nation of factory workers? I know I don't.

That's a really narrow definition of 'manufacturing' you have their.

"Manufacturing is a mugs game"... just when I thought I'd read it all.

Its also pretty likely to overtake the US economy in size during the next presidential term.

What spurred China's economy was not a government stimulus program. China became the worlds manufacturing center, its hundreds of thousands of low cost labor providing a manufacturing base for every major company in the world.

What you don't hear about however is the damage to their ecosystem, many say irreparable, with air and water quality as bad as any place on the planet.

New buildings erected only in the last ten years are suffering so much damage from acid rain that they will need to be completely torn down and rebuilt in the next ten years.

The government was able to spend money without borrowing, because their economy is generating cash - not the other way around.

What I find insane is that with all the debt the country is in, Network Rail decided to announce a £37.5 billion 'upgrade' to the rail network.

The end result of which will be 'slightly less delays, and a few more trains into London'. No modernisation of trains, no faster trains...just preventative measures and upgrading some very old northern lines to electric lines (most of which only run a handfull of times a day anyway!)

The reality is that it'll be besotted with delays, be overbudget, not really fix anything, and will cause ticket prices to skyrocket.

The killer here is that whilst Network Rail is a private company. Its not owned by anyone, and it doesnt dish profits out to shareholders. This sounds good. But when it comes to large projects, who foots the bill given that they dont have that kind of cash to spend? You got it. We do.

The premise is false and ignores the bigger problem the UK has. It's lack of natural resources,

Hasn't mattered much since the early 19th century when the cost of trade started declining steeply. In fact, in recent decades, a country being rich in natural resources seems to be an economic curse for some reason.

Quote:

isolated island position

See above. Not to mention airplanes, ferries, the chunnel, and the internet.

Quote:

and high price currency. What killed the UK was the singular focus of both Tory and Labor governments since Thatcher on doing everything they could to support the banking sector which in turn killed their real world economy. Given that two of the 3 factors I outlined are not changeable, the only way the UK can stimulate real world economic growth would be to join the Eurozone, but I don't see that happening.

Not clear if I understand your argument. Are you saying that having a favored currency damages the entire economy, or just manufacturing, or something else? On this group, and in the news media, we frequently see assertions that what is lost in manufacturing is more than made up elsewhere.

What I see is that worldwide, there seems be a problem with employing and sharing equitably with the below-average in almost every country. (This wasn't such a problem in the post-WWII-era.)

The premise is false and ignores the bigger problem the UK has. It's lack of natural resources, isolated island position and high price currency. What killed the UK was the singular focus of both Tory and Labor governments since Thatcher on doing everything they could to support the banking sector which in turn killed their real world economy. Given that two of the 3 factors I outlined are not changeable, the only way the UK can stimulate real world economic growth would be to join the Eurozone, but I don't see that happening.

Please don't even say that even as a joke.

__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'

The premise is false and ignores the bigger problem the UK has. It's lack of natural resources, isolated island position and high price currency.

Eh? I'd have thought that one of our biggest problems has been that we've actually had a whopping great big natural resource. North Sea oil. It has enabled successive governments to kick the can down the road since about I guess the 70's.

(Mind you, our dented can has recently had quite a few others clang down the road to join it in the past few years...)

The only currency worse off than the USD, IMO, is GBP with perhaps Yen as an also ran. Toilet currencies the lot of them.

Since U.S. currency is so distasteful, feel free to send me a carton of $20 bills

Seriously, if you have ever been to a country in the throes of hyperinflation, you will know the difference. U.S. currency is working fine as a medium of exchange. For some reason, you want money to also be a long-term store of value.

Since U.S. currency is so distasteful, feel free to send me a carton of $20 bills

Seriously, if you have ever been to a country in the throes of hyperinflation, you will know the difference. U.S. currency is working fine as a medium of exchange. For some reason, you want money to also be a long-term store of value.

I have no US bills of any denomination to send you, sorry. I wouldn't touch that stinking pig with a barge pole. For long-term stores of value, there are only a few choices in real assets and a fiat currency is obviously not one of them. My objection lies in the shorter term. Good luck with Carney, btw. He will have some troubled waters to navigate in the next few years.

Hasn't mattered much since the early 19th century when the cost of trade started declining steeply. In fact, in recent decades, a country being rich in natural resources seems to be an economic curse for some reason.

For poor countries that get screwed over by wars, IMF, the World Bank and private companies - yes. For industrialised countries and poor countries with strong leaders that have half a brain - not so much.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by flopticalcube

I have no US bills of any denomination to send you, sorry. I wouldn't touch that stinking pig with a barge pole. For long-term stores of value, there are only a few choices in real assets and a fiat currency is obviously not one of them. My objection lies in the shorter term. Good luck with Carney, btw. He will have some troubled waters to navigate in the next few years.

Hear, hear! Unless daytrading currency, the only thing people should do is bet against every single of of them.